The Catch Rule-New recomendations

xer0h0ur · Mar 21, 2018

modo said:
so if the guy reaches for the ball and is falling but hits the ground and the ball goes squirting away it is a catch....not sure what this means

? That is either a fumble or incomplete catch. The "football move" part still comes into play there. Since there was no football move with him falling trying to make the catch then its incomplete.

playthrough2001 · Mar 21, 2018

Gustavus Adolphus said:
My *guess* is that it would have to do with being hit by a defender and the ball pops out. Making it a catch-fumble.

You're exactly right because these changes will lead to a bunch of catch fumbles that were previously incomplete passes. Defensive players are going to have to be coached up to hit the ground and get the ball and let the ref make the decision whether it's a recovery or not. I'll bet there will be a number of plays where D players will be standing around because their muscle memory will tell them the pass was incomplete.

Madden · Mar 21, 2018

SpeedRacer said:
3-3 is bogus. You want it simple? Than this:

1. Control.
2. Two Feet Down or Body Part.
3. Ground Can't Cause a Fumble.

Just like a running back, if receiver completes 1 and 2 above, then if it comes loose at the ground, the ball is dead there. Still a catch. If he completes 1 and 2 and a defender knocks it loose, its a fumble. Simple.

That's how is should be. The milisecond the 2nd foot comes down with control, it's a catch. If ball is being obviously bobbled (loses contact with hands/arms where you can see a gap on more than half of the ball), than you have to wait until ball is in secured before you count the 2 steps.

It seems like that's how it used to be before people got up in arms about bang bang plays, thinking they should be incomplete since the WR only had it for a split second even though 2 feet touched down. It doesn't matter how long the WR has the ball. 2 feet down with control is a catch. Anything after that is a fumble.

This give a little power back to the defense, since it has swung too far in favor of WR's in the past 10 years or so.

Gustavus Adolphus · Mar 21, 2018

playthrough2001 said:
You're exactly right because these changes will lead to a bunch of catch fumbles that were previously incomplete passes. Defensive players are going to have to be coached up to hit the ground and get the ball and let the ref make the decision whether it's a recovery or not. I'll bet there will be a number of plays where D players will be standing around because their muscle memory will tell them the pass was incomplete.

Ares in post #6 also has a very good thought on what it could be as well.

Madden · Mar 21, 2018

Mdbearz said:
Simplier is better, so hopefully they figure this out.

Another rule that I think needs to be changed is fumbling the ball through the end zone. The punishment does not fit the behavior. move it back to either the 1 yard line or where the runner last possessed the ball which ever is further, not a touchback!

And they are talking about Pass interference being a 15 yard penalty. - Give the defense some power back!

I hate the fumble out of the end zone rule, and I don't think anyone likes it or understands it. Should have been changed years ago. Hell, make it a 15 yard penalty if you have to - anything but a turnover when the defense never even had control of the ball at any point. Really it should just go back to the spot of the fumble like what happens on any other part of the field when the ball is fumbled out of bounds.

Monsieur Tirets · Mar 21, 2018

everyone seems to really over complicate this shit. just hold onto the ball and you leave no question as to whether or not it was caught.

simple.

anotheridiot · Mar 21, 2018

If a running back can carry the ball, reach over the goal line, and as long as he broke the plane with the ball in his possession, its a TD. Ground cannot cause a fumble. Same play a receiver (like James with Pittsburg) takes one step reaches over the ball in his possession, hits the ground and it moves and they rule it not a catch. I am pretty sure the league said they were wrong in the pittsburg play, but Its either breaking the plane or not. It should not matter who has the ball or how he got it.

modo · Mar 21, 2018

SpeedRacer said:
If a receiver lays out and ball hits ground first and pops it loses, 1 and 2 were not completed, incomplete. If he lays out and has control, then he lands on his side and rolls over and THEN the ground causes fumble, then it is completed pass and the ball is down there (if we go with my rule number 3 in the post above).

only if he is touched...otherwise it would be a completed pass and fumble.

modo · Mar 21, 2018

There is a misconception on the ground can't cause a fumble rule......the ground can cause a fumble if the player was not touched when going down.....unless he breaks the plane of course.

Toast88 · Mar 22, 2018

There is no "football move" in the current catch rule. They got rid of that in previous years.

This proposed rule change would put it back in, but get rid of the ground as a factor.

I *guess* I'm O.K. with it, but it highlights the problem with any version of a catch rule---It's going to be open to interpretation and have to use vague language that will be stretched to the max during actual gameplay.

Truth be told, I didn't have a problem with "surviving the ground". If I tossed you a vase, and you grabbed it while falling and it broke while you were hitting the ground, I wouldn't say you caught the vase.

This proposed rule has the same problem, in that the issue will be, as it used to, "What is a football move?" And, as always, "What is control?"

Visionman · Mar 22, 2018

Toast88 said:
There is no "football move" in the current catch rule. They got rid of that in previous years.

This proposed rule change would put it back in, but get rid of the ground as a factor.

I *guess* I'm O.K. with it, but it highlights the problem with any version of a catch rule---It's going to be open to interpretation and have to use vague language that will be stretched to the max during actual gameplay.

Truth be told, I didn't have a problem with "surviving the ground". If I tossed you a vase, and you grabbed it while falling and it broke while you were hitting the ground, I wouldn't say you caught the vase.

This proposed rule has the same problem, in that the issue will be, as it used to, "What is a football move?" And, as always, "What is control?"

Much easier to determine if "the process" was completed to the ground than to determine if a player makes a "Football move".

Mdbearz · Mar 22, 2018

Visionman said:
Much easier to determine if "the process" was completed to the ground than to determine if a player makes a "Football move".

I think that the "survive the ground" rule was to make it easier on the refs, but it became obvious in many cases they did survive the ground but voluntarily let go too soon (Miller, Megatron ect..).

Football move, should be nothing more than a movement that attempts to make more yardage, even if that is going backward to avoid a tackle.

Possession has not been a huge controversy, it simply means that the player controls the movement of the ball, even if it moves slightly, like switching hands and sliding slightly, but maintaining control.

Two feet down is not an issue either.

There is a better chance that a bang-bang play could be a catch with a fumble, so the defense can benefit from this rule too, it is not just an advantage to the offense like so many of the new rule tend to lean towards.

NCChiFan · Mar 22, 2018

Mdbearz said:
Simplier is better, so hopefully they figure this out.

Another rule that I think needs to be changed is fumbling the ball through the end zone. The punishment does not fit the behavior. move it back to either the 1 yard line or where the runner last possessed the ball which ever is further, not a touchback!

And they are talking about Pass interference being a 15 yard penalty. - Give the defense some power back!

Bad idea, will lead to more penalties on long pass attempts.

SpeedRacer · Mar 22, 2018

What if we just go with rules 1 and 2 and dump the football move rule. Can someone explain a situation where that would be foggy or unfair?

Mdbearz · Mar 22, 2018

Madden said:
I hate the fumble out of the end zone rule, and I don't think anyone likes it or understands it. Should have been changed years ago. Hell, make it a 15 yard penalty if you have to - anything but a turnover when the defense never even had control of the ball at any point. Really it should just go back to the spot of the fumble like what happens on any other part of the field when the ball is fumbled out of bounds.

I agree, even in a safety, the defense prevents the ball from coming out of the endzone. When a ball is fumbled it should not be a turnover unless the other team takes possession.

Stupid rule that needs to go away.

Mdbearz · Mar 22, 2018

SpeedRacer said:
What if we just go with rules 1 and 2 and dump the football move rule. Can someone explain a situation where that would be foggy or unfair?

All I can think of is the catching drill at the combine where they throw the ball down immediately, with only 1 and 2 it could look like that....in the endzone

Bears_804 · Mar 22, 2018

catch rule is out of hand...

I also saw they were tossing around the idea of PI being an automatic 15 yard penalty instead of spot of foul. While I personally don't like the spot fouls at times, I think encouraging and egregious PI past 15 yards knowing it won't be a spot foul is way too likely across the board. Could be detrimental to the deep ball game.

SpeedRacer · Mar 22, 2018

Bears_804 said:
I also saw they were tossing around the idea of PI being an automatic 15 yard penalty instead of spot of foul. While I personally don't like the spot fouls at times, I think encouraging and egregious PI past 15 yards knowing it won't be a spot foul is way too likely across the board. Could be detrimental to the deep ball game.

How about make it a 20 yard penalty for anything over 20 yards.

Bears_804 · Mar 22, 2018

SpeedRacer said:
How about make it a 20 yard penalty for anything over 20 yards.

IMHO, if it's a bomb past 20 they'll just PI the hell out of them bc 20 is better than a TD or 20+ yards. :dunno:

Visionman · Mar 22, 2018

Bears_804 said:
catch rule is out of hand...

I also saw they were tossing around the idea of PI being an automatic 15 yard penalty instead of spot of foul. While I personally don't like the spot fouls at times, I think encouraging and egregious PI past 15 yards knowing it won't be a spot foul is way too likely across the board. Could be detrimental to the deep ball game.

Could add in a "flagrant foul" option for those situations.

Of course, that leaves it up to the officials for their interpretation of that...but PI is basically a judgement call anyway, so...

The Catch Rule-New recomendations

HS Referee HoF

My favorite teams

Monday Morning QB

My favorite teams

Well-known member

?‍♂️?

My favorite teams

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Based

Based

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Bald, fat, toothless

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member